HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1971/04/05 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFONRIA
April 5, 1971
The regular meeting of the City Planning Commission of Chula Vista, California,
was held on the above date beginning at 7:00 p.m. with the following members
present: Rice, Stewart, Adams, Macevicz, Chandler, James and Hillson. Also
present: Director of Planning Warren, Senior Planner Williams, Associate
Planner Lee and Assistant City Attorney Blick.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MSUC (Chandler-James) Approval of the minutes of the meeting of March 22,1971,
as mailed.
PUBLIC HEARING: PREZONING - Third Avenue south of Kennedy Street from
County C-2 and R-2-A to C-C - Bart Corporation - County
Properties, Inc.
Director of Planning Warren indicated on a plat the area being considered for
prezoning which includes 8.8 acres bounded by Third Avenue, Kennedy Street and
Palomar Street, extending to a depth of 620.7 feet from Third Avenue. Mr. Warren
pointed out the adjacent zoning in the County noting that commercial zoning has
been applied to a 200' strip on both sides of Third Avenue with some type of
multiple family residential zoning adjacent to the commercial. Property on the
south side of Palomar Street is zoned for and developed with a shopping center.
Mr. Warren commented that the staff recommends prezoning this area C-C to provide
sufficient depth from Third Avenue for a desirable commercial development which
the applicant proposes for the northern half of the property, but that a precise
plan for the development ~hould be required before the prezoning becomes effective.
H
e noted there are two problems confronting the Commission wi th regard to this
request; one being protest from adjacent property owners as evidenced by a
petition containing lO signatures representing 9 parcels of land. The basic
problem is that the General Plan places all of this area in high density
residential use. The type of development that has taken place in this area
under the County jurisdiction also presents a problem in planning.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Louis Wolfsheimer, attorney representing the applicant, confirmed their concurrence
with the recommendation of the staff for the portion of the property which they own.
He stressed their desire to annex to the City of Chula Vista and to construct a
well planned and developed shopping center. He pointed out that the adjacent
properties in the county would be better protected due to the stringent restrictions of
the City zoning Ordinance. He enumerated the many commercial uses that would be
allowed under the present County zoning of C-2 which is a ~eavy commercial zone.
-2- 4/5/71
Mr. Wolfsheimer pointed out the various commercial uses presently existing
along Third Avenue under both County and City zoning and asserted that the
pattern on Third Avenue has been set and it would be unrealistic to believe
this area would be redeveloped for residential use.
Gerald Dawson, attorney, 1900 First National Bank Building, San Diego,
representing Mr. Fred Leeds and Mr. Matt Strauss, owners of the property on the
north side of Kennedy Street where apartments are presently under construction,
stressed the fact that the proposed prezoning does not conform to the General
Plan; he also maintained there is no necessity for additional commercial zoning
in this area and that it would be better to eliminate the strip commercial zoning
along Third Avenue than to extend it to a greater depth. He also referred to
studies made by the San Diego County Planning Department and a citizens committee
in which residential zoning was recommended for this area and asserted that all
of the owners of adjacent property are planning to develop with apartments.
Kathryn Moore, 1134 Tobias Drive, stated that she served on the County Citizens
Committee that did the zoning study, and that she was also speaking for the South
Bay Citizens Planning Committee which did not feel there should be any more
shopping centers in this area. She asserted the commercial development is
getting tremendous in the area and the traffic is getting tremendous until the
residents can hardly get around; there is too much concentration of commercial
use and of high density residential use in that area.
Joseph L. Green, 222 G Street, owner of the parcel on Palomar presently zoned
C in the County, stated that he has no objection to further commercial zoning
in the area.
Mr. Wolfsheimer advised that the applicant would be willing to drop the request
commercial zoning on the single lot they own fronting on Palomar Street.
Charles L. Smucker, one of the owners of the southeast quadrant of the area
under consideration, stated they would welcome being annexed to the City of
Chula Vista if that portion of the area were prezoned R-3, but they would not
favor C-C zoning for their property.
Chairman Rice asked if that portion could be prezoned R-3 instead of C-C since
the hearing was advertised for C-C zoning. It was ascertained that any more
restrictive zoning than that advertised can be applied.
Director of Planning Warren pointed out the benefit to the area in having
commercial development take place under City standards rather than under the
County.
The public hearing was closed and the Commission discussed applying the Precise
Plan Modifying Distrct to the commercial zoning and were in agreement this would
assure development that would be a benefit to the City and to the surrounding area.
MSUC (Chandler-Macevicz) Recommend to City Council the prezoning of 8.6 acres
located east of Third Avenue between Kennedy and Palomar
Streets to C-C-P and R-3, subject to the following
conditions for dedication and improvement:
-3- 4/5/71
A. Dedication and improvement of additional right of way for Kennedy Street
or any other dedication as required by the City Engineer.
B. A subdivision map shall be filed and recorded.
C. A Precise Plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Commission
for the area designated C-C-P by this prezoning within one year of approval
by the City Council. If no plan is submitted and approved by that date the
Planning Commission shall review the prezoning and make appropriate changes
and/or modifications. The Precise Plan shall adhere to the following guidelines:
1) Limited ingress or egress onto Kennedy Street from the property.
2) Commercial building orientation shall be towards Third Avenue.
3) All loading, trash and storage areas shall be located within the
development and be adequately screened with walls, buildings and
landscaping.
4) A comprehensive sign program for the entire area shall be submitted
and approved by staff prior to the issuance of a building permit for
any signs.
Findings of fact are as follows:
A. The increase in depth of the present commercial area is consistent with the
General Plan's goal and objective toward elimination of strip co~ercial.
B. The attachment of the "P" Modifying District to the C-C zoning would insure
orderly development of the property, thereby insuring compatibility with the
adjacent areas.
C. Since the adjacent property to the south and to the east is presently zoned
for multiple family use, R-$ zoning for the southeast corner of subject
property is compatible with that use.
PUBLIC HEARINGS: a. REZONING - 621 L Street - R-3 to I-L Limited Industrial -
Imperial Truck Lines, Inc.
b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 50' x 24~ addition to existing
do.~k building; construction of new wash and service building -
Imperial Truck Lines, Inc.
c. VARIANCE - Reduction of rear yard - 50' to 0 for construction
of builidn~ - Imperial Truck Linesi Inc.
Associate Planner Lee indicated the location of the property located on the north
side of L Street and presently zoned R-3. He pointed out the zoning of the
surrounding property which includes residential on the north and west, commercial
zoning adjacent on the east facing Broadway, and industrial zoning on the opposite
side of L Street. He reported thata zone variance was granted in 1950 to utilize
the subject property for M-1 or industrial use, and the trucking facility has been
in operation on the site since that time. He reviewed previous applications
_ covering improvement of the property and displayed a site plan indicating the
location of the existing building and the proposed additions.
-4- 4/5/71
The staff recommends the requirement of a Precise Plan in connection with the
rezoning which would include limiting truck access from L Street, landscaping,
and extension of a 9' high block wall along the westerly and northerly property
lines.
Mr. Lee pointed out the conditional use permit is required for ~he expansion of
the facilities and for the continued operation of this business if the zone change
is granted, however, this would afford the City more control than under the
present use variance.
One letter and a petition of protest of the zone change application are on file
in the Planning Department
This being the time.and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Donald R. Worley, attorney with Seltzer, Caplan, Wilkins & McMahon, 3003 Fourth
Avenue, San Diego, representing the owners of the property, Mr. and Mrs. John
Wanders, and the lessee, Imperial Truck Lines, expressed agreement with the staff
report of the advantage of placing this property in the industrial zone and
thereby gaining more control through the requirement of the conditional use
permit and the performance standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance. He
reported that the applicant is willing to abide by all of the guidelines
recommended with the exception that they would like to use the westerly access
between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.
Stella Dembowski, 871 Riverlawn, declared that trucks operating between the
hours of 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. create a health hazard through the emission
of fumes and noise and she felt the zoning should be denied.
Herbert Young, 873 Riverlawn, complained of the noise caused by diesel trucks
roaring on L Street during the night and requested that they be banned from using
L STreet after dark. He further requested that the Planning Commission recommend
to the City Council that the variance granted for this use be terminated inasmuch
as the trucking company has violated the terms of their permit.
Director of Planning Warren reported that the City Attorney has given the opinion
that there is no way to terminate the variance granted in'1950. He also pointed
out steps which have been taken to decrease the noise and reiterated that
rezoning permits no new land use, but gives better control over that existing.
Earl Farris, 899 Riverlawn, commented he would not try to ban trucks from L Street
but would like to ban Imperial Truck Lines from parking trucks adjacent to the
property line and leaving the motors running.
MSUC (Adams-Macevicz) Recommend to City Council the change of zone for 621 L
Street from R-3 to I-L-P Limited Industrial with a precise
plan applying the following guidelines:
-5- 4/5/71
a) No truck access shall be granted from L Street between the existing
structure and the westerly property line unless the applicant can show that
such access will not interfere with the proposed use of this area for employee
parking and landscaping in conformance with the Landscape Manual. If such a
plan can be worked out this access may be used during the hours of 8:00 a.m. to
6:00 p.m.
b) The area between the parking area and storage room and L Street shall be
landscaped. If practical, some landscaping shall be utilized between L Street
and the loading dock area.
c) A 9 foot high block wall shall be extended southerly along the west property
line for a distance of approximately 120 feet to coincide with the parking area
and approximately 120 feet easterly along the north property line.
d) The proposed wash building shall be restudied for possible relocation
adjacent to the westerly portion of the existing office area.
Findings are as follows:
a) Because of the orientation of this property away from the adjacent residential
use and toward the industrial zoning across L Street, industrial use of this
property could be accommodated and would constitute a logical zoning pattern.
b) Although this area is designated for high density residential use on the
General Plan, the orientation of this lot to an industrial area, and easy access to
Interstate 5 via L Street, make this property more suitable for industrial development.
c) The use of the property as a truck terminal has existed for 21 years under a
variance which permits this use to continue indefinitely. Rezoning will actually
afford more control over this use than is currently possible.
Member Hillson asked if there is sufficient room behind the building to maneuver
the trucks without using the westerly access.
Don Worley reported that prohibiting use of that access makes it a little more
difficult during the day and they would agree to extend the wall further towards
L Street if they could use that access during the day.
The Commission recommended that the applicant work with the staff and if it is
determined that the use of that access would not interfere with employee parking
or eliminate the 1Bndscaping, then such'access would be restricted only during
the night time hours.
MSUC (Adams-James) Approval of a conditional use permit to Imperial Truck
RESOLUTION NO. PCC-71-4 Lines, Inc., for the modification of a trucking facility
by the construction of a 50' x 24~ addition to the
existing dock building and a new wash and service building,
and for the continued operation of this trucking facility
following the enactment of a change of zone on the property
toI-L-P.
-6- 4/5/71
This conditional use permit is granted subject to the following conditions:
1. If truck access from L Street between the dock building and the west property
line is approved under the Precise Plan, such access will be utilized only during
the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
2. Any overnight vehicles with engines running shall be placed as near as
practicable to the southeast portion of the property.
3. Upon the effective date of this conditional use permit and the zone change
to I-L-P, the use variance under which this use is currently operating shall
become null and void.
4. This use shall comply with all provisions of the performance standard section
(33.701-704) of the Zoning Ordinance.
Findings are as follows:
a) That the proposed use at the particular location is necessary or desirable to
provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well being of
the neighborhood or the community.
This facility will have easy access along a major road, L Street, to
Interstate 5.
b) That such use will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be
detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or
working in the vicinity, or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity.
Because of the orientation of this lot toward the adjacent industrial zoning
and away from the residential area, the imposition of a Precise Plan
requirement, and the conditions of development contained within the Zoning
Ordinance, this use will not be detrimental.
c) That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions
specified in the Code for such use.
All conditions of this use permit and the Precise Plan, and all regulations
of the City Code will be complied with.
d) That the granting of this conditional use will not adversely affect the
General Plan of the City of Chula Vista or the adopted plan of any governmental
agency.
Because of the orientation of this specific lot to existing industrial
zoning the intent of the General Plan is not affected.
-7- 4/5/71
As stipulated in the guidelines for the Precise Plan an effort will be made to
relocate the proposed wash building adjacent to the westerly portion of the
existing building. If they can be accomplished, the variance for reduction
of setback to 0 would not be required. The staff recommends that the hearing
on the variance request be continued to the meeting of May 3, or to coincide
with approval of the Precise Plan.
MSUC (Stewart-Chandler) Public hearing on the application for variance for
reduction of rear year from 50' to 0 be continued to the meeting of May 3, 1971.
PUBLIC HEARING: CHANGE OF SETBACK - Fifth Avenue~ north of H Street ~ 25' to 10' Homefair Department Store
Associate Planner Lee displayed a plot plan of the Homefair shopping center and
pointed out the location of all uses adjacent to Fifth Avenue and the location
of a proposed theater with the entry oriented toward Farrells ice cream store.
He discussed the parking requirements for this center and advised that construction
of this theater would complete development of the center. Chairman Rice opened
the public hearing.
Cliff Burford, representing the applicant, discussed the location of the proposed
theater 10' from the property line adjacent to Fifth Avenue and emphasized the
plaza area and landscaping between the theater and ice cream store. He advised
that the applicant is satisfied with sign area oriented to the south and would not
request signing on the west end of the marquee.
Dale Lane, who will be the operator of the franchised theater, explained the
operation of the theater which will be completely family oriented, showing G and
GP films. He stressed that the outside appearance of the building would be as
well maintained as the inside.
Bob Edwards of Edwards and Young Architects, Inc. in answer to a question
concerning the height of this building advised that the main building is 23 feet
high and the height of the marquee is 16 feet, the approximate area of the plaza
is 3456 square feet. The purpose of this design is to get the patrons waiting
for entrance off the public sidewalk; the plaza will accomplish this purpose.
Jim Magot, co-owner of Farrells ice cream store, reported that from a business
standpoint, they are very enthusiastic about this use. He also felt it would
be an attractive addition to the shopping center.
Kathryn Moore, 1134 Tobias Drive, reported that the South Bay Planning Committee
is very much in favor of this proposed theater; it is a forward looking concept
and the design is excellent; also competition between theaters should promote the
showing of better programs.
MSUC (Macevicz-James) Approval of revised site plan for Homefair shopping center
RESOLUTION PCZ-71-G and recommend to City Council the change of front setback
from 25' to 10' on the east side of Fifth Avenue extending
from H Street 620 feet north, with the provision that any
buildings located closer than 25 feet to the public right of
way shall not utilize Fifth Avenue for sign exposure or building
entrance, with the exception of the existing Farrells building.
-8- 4/5/71
Findings of fact are as follows:
a) The change in setback would permit a more orderly development of the
property.
b) Fifth Avenue is a secondary street and ample sight vision would be
maintained with the 10 foot setback.
c) Other buildings on the same property and vicinity have similar setbacks.
PUBLIC HEARING: VARIANCE - 934 Nacion Avenue - Reduction of side yard 5' to
3'10" - Mr. and Mrs. Robert G. Cartmill
Associate Planner Lee displayed a plat of the ~ot showing the location of the
existing dwelling and of the proposed 18' x 43' addition which would encroach
to within 3'10" of the property line. He also pointed out the adjacent dwelling
is 25' from the property line which would leave a 28'10" separation between the
buildings; however, that owner could legally build to within 5' of the property
line, which would not leave adequate separation, although there is a 10' difference
in lot elevation. The staff recommends denial of the request since it is felt the
applicant has sufficient lot area to construct a substantial addition without
encroaching into the required side yard.
The public hearing was opened.
_ Ann Cartmill, 934 Nacion, commented that the staff had not given enough consideration
to the difference in elevation, since to build within 5' of their property line
the adjacent owner wouldhave to install a 7' retaining wall which would be quite
expensive.
Bob Cartmill, 934 Nacion, reported on their need for the additional living area
and that they Nad cut the size down as much as possible in the interest of economy
but felt they need the 18 foot width for good interior design. He also felt this
addition would be preferable to a second story addition.
Mr. Cartmill also commented that the 3'10" measurement would be from the proposed
addition to the fence and they Nad been informed the fence was erected one foot
inside their property line.
In discussion the Commission could find no hardship peculiar to this property
to justify granting the variance request and recommended that the applicant
determine the exact location of the property line and construct the addition to
the legal 5' setback from the property line rather than measuring the distance
from the fence.
The public hearing was closed.
MSC (Adams-Macevicz) Denial of the request for variance for reduction of side
yard to 3'10" at 934 Nacion Avenue.
The motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: Members Adams, Macevicz, Rice, Stewart and Hillson
NOES: Members Chandler and James
ABSENT: None
-9- 4/5/71
PUBLIC HEARING: VARIANCE - Lot 217. Chula Vista Gardens~ Unit #7 - Reduction of
-- front ~ard from 15~ to 8', rear yard 20' to 5' - Nacion Associate~
Associate Planner Lee indicated on a plat the location of the lot as shown on the
tentative map of the subdivision and also displayed a plat showing the location of
the models which the applicant proposes to use on Lot 217 and the adjacent lot, which
would require the requested reduction in front and rear yard. Mr. Lee pointed
out, however, that by switching these two models and making a slight revision
to the floor plan a dwelling could be constructed on Lot 217 without requiring a
reduction in the front yard and with a reduction to 10' for the rear yard.
The staff recommends granting a variance for reduction of the rear yard to 10'
to accommodate this construction and make this a buildable lot without redesigning
the subdivision.
Jerry Linton, representing Nacion Associates, reminded the Commission that this
particular lot had been recognized as presenting a problem at the time the
tentative map was approved, and one of the conditions of approval was that a
variance request be submitted. He concurred that making the alteration as
proposed by Mr. Lee is possible, but the builder feels making the change in the
floor plan and the exterior due to the different placement on the lot would be
a hardship on them.
In discussion, the Commission expressed the feeling that the builder should be
willing to make some modification in order to best fit a model on this lot and
that there is no hardship which would justify granting the variance as requested.
This has been done in other subdivisions.
MSUC (Hillson-Adams) Denial of the request for front and rear yard reduction
RESOLUTION NO. PCV-71-5 and approval of a variance for a reduction of rear
yard from 20' to 10~ for Lot 217 of Chula Vista Gardens
#7 subject to the following condition:
This rear yard portion may be improved with a one story structure not to occupy
more than 30% of the required 20' rear yard.
Findings are as follows:
a. That a hardship peculiar to the property and not created by any act of the
owner exists.
Because of the configuration of the lot, development without a variance
is precluded.
b. That this variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of
substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same zone
and in the vicinity of the subject property.
Without this variance, development of this property would have to be
accommodated on an area too small for a dwelling and garage of the size
specified in the Zoning Ordinance.
-10- 4/5/71
c. That the authorizing of this variance will not be of substantial detriment
to adjacent property and will not materially impair the purposes of the Ordinance
or the public interest.
This variance will not impair the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance or be
detrimental to the area because adequate separation will be maintained and
open space provided.
d. That the granting of a variance will not be contrary to the objectives of
the General Plan.
The General Plan is not affected by this variance.
SUBDIVISION - Chula Vista Gardens #7 - Request for approval of final map
This subdivision, located between Oneida and East Palomar Street east of Nolan
Avenue, consists of 19 lots and is in conformance with the approved tentative
map. Granting of a variance making Lot 217 a buildable lot fulfills the condition
required by the Commission.
MSUC (Chandler-Macevicz) Recommend to City Council approval of the final map
for Chula Vista Gardens Unit #7.
Request for deferral of public improvements - 1480 First Avenue - S.Muraoka
- Director of Planning Warren reported that this request is in connection with
an approved move-in of a dwelling from 1436 First Avenue to 1480 First Avenue.
The owner is developing plans for an addition to the Palace Gardens Mobile
Park which will necessitate the construction of public improvements on First
Avenue from Quintard Street south to 1480 First Avenue. He is requesting a
deferral to allow him to construct all the improvements at one time. The staff
recommends approval of the request.
MSUC (Chandler-Macevicz) Approval of the request for deferral of public improve-
ments at 1480 First Avenue subject to the posting of a bond to cover the cost of
the necessary improvements.
Discussion of buildinQ materials for Brand~vwine Development
Director of Planning Warren recalled for the Commission the previous discussion
concerning the type of roofing material to be used for this development. The
architect has prepared a display showing the colors and textures of trim and
the asphalt shingles which they propose to use. The Commission had previously
expressed a preference for shake shingles or a material that would simulate
wood shingles, but the applicant stated initially that shake would not be used.
Dan Salerno, architect on the project, advised that these homes have been
designed for a )ow end sales program and they have endeavored to provide good,
attractive units, which would be low in price. They feel that mission tile, cement
tile, or wood shake roofs would not be dollars well spent. He pointed out other
-11- 4/5/71
materials they are using to enhance the overall appearance of the project, such
as textured stucco and heavy landscaping. They are using roof materials that take
on the color of wood shingles but do not take on the texture.
Mr. Salerno read a letter he had received from Ray Lobbes, Chief Architect for
F.H.A., which stated that they do not recommend wood shingles or cement tile
materials for this subdivision. Mr. Salerno also pointed out that composition
shingles will outlast wood shingle roof and reduce the fire hazard.
Russ Richard, manager of the Brandywine Project, commented that it is their
desire to provide a large planned community of non-subsidized housing that will
appeal to buyers that are not in the upper income bracket - those who cannot buy
in the $25,000 and up subdivision. He reported they have added over $35,000 worth
of amenities to the project which are not shown on the plan, these include an
adult pool and wading pool, and horseshoe pits.
Chairman Rice expressed the opinion that wood or tile roof would add to the
appearance of the buildings. It was the concensus, though, that this could not
be made a requirement for the project, and it was requested that the developer
meet with the staff to determine a distribution of colors of the asphalt shingles
throughout the project.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Director of Planning Warren referred to a letter received from Richard A. Gant,
attorney for Far West Services, requesting information as to when a rezoning study
of I Street, east of Broadway, would be completed. Mr. Warren asked for the
Commission's directive concerning the priority of such a study.
Member Stewart commented that he felt there had been conflicting views by the
staff and the Commission, mainly on the matter of control of the encroachment of
commercial use up I Street. He felt this matter warranted further study and a
report to the Commission.
Chairman Rice directed that a study be undertaken as soon as possible.
The meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
X.: /
-Helen
S. Mapes, Secretar¢
Chula Vista Planning Commission